§ 4.15 p.m.
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, with the leave of the House, I will answer a Question that was put to me by my noble friend Lord Brockway by repeating a Statement which has been made in another place by my right honourable friend the Prime Minister. The Statement is as follows:
"With permission, Mr. Speaker, I will now answer Questions 7 and 9 together.
"As the House knows, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and I met our European Community colleagues at the European Council in Rome on the 1st and 2nd December.
" We reviewed first the world economic situation, in the light of the summit meeting at Rambouillet on the 15th and 16th November. I found my colleagues in broad agreement with the conclusions reached at that meeting on which I have reported to the House. The European Council also dealt with a number of items of Community business and made satisfactory progress with the arrangements for the Conference on International Economic Co-operation (CIEC). Copies of the working documents agreed at the meeting are being placed in the Library of the House.
" There was general agreement with the proposals on financial control in the Community, on which I drew from our experience of the working of our own Public Accounts Committee and the Accounting Officer system, which I had put forward, and which will be published shortly as a White Paper. I believe that this represents an important step towards ensuring effective control over expenditure in the Community.
" The European Council agreed that Direct Elections to the European Parliament shall take place in May or June 1978; but that any country which at that date is unable to hold Direct Elections shall be allowed to appoint its representatives, as is done at present. I made it clear that we accept in principle the committment to Direct 773 Elections in the Treaty of Rome, since this issue was decided by the referendum, since Article 138(3) of the Treaty of Rome is mandatory here. But 1 added that we required a further period for consultations with political parties in this House and for consideration of the matter by Parliament before we could adopt a final position about holding Direct Elections ourselves as early as1978. The Council will now continue its examination of the matters to be decided at the Community level, such as the number and distribution of seats, and will prepare a draft Convention for submission to the next European Council.
" The European Council agreed on the introduction of a uniform passport which may be issued as from 1978. As far as Passport Union is concerned, I made it clear that, for our part, the timing would depend on progress with revision of our own nationality legislation, and I could give no assurances about the timing of that legislation. The European Council also adopted a British proposal that Community Ministers responsible for law and order should meet to discuss matters coming within their competence.
" Finally, the European Council discussed at great length the arrangements for the CIEC and a compromise agreement was reached which fully safeguards Britain's interests.
" On substance, agreement was reached for the first time in the Community on two important elements which have already been agreed by eight Member-States in the IEA including the United Kingdom; namely, emergency oil sharing and the principle of a minimum safeguard price mechanism.
" The latter point is particularly important. In the words agreed in Rome, ' the Council will decide as soon as possible appropriate mechanisms to protect existing supplies and ensure the development of alternative sources of Community energy, on reasonable economic terms, and to encourage conservation in the use of energy '.
" My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and 774 Commonwealth Affairs and I had made it clear as long ago as October, the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs publicly and myself directly to the Federal German Chancellor, that we were concerned to get a viable agreed Community position on energy before the Conference. As I put it then, it seemed to us reasonable that the nine Member-States should be represented through the Community where there was a common policy, but that there was every reason why the United Kingdom should be present in its own right, as one of the eight industrialised country representatives at a conference of such far-reaching importance, so that we could put forward our own views where these were not covered by a Community mandate. What was important was that we should have a much more far-reaching, agreed mandate for the Community as a whole.
" I believe that the agreement which my right honourable friend and I were able to secure after lengthy discussion in Rome, namely for the United Kingdom to have a separate voice both at the Ministerial Conference and in the four Commissions which will subsequently be meeting at official level, has, as I will demonstrate, achieved our purpose. The Community will be represented by a single delegation and the spokesman will be the President of the Council with the Commission. But during the Ministerial Conference the United Kingdom and Luxembourg, the latter in her capacity as the next President, will, in the words agreed in Rome, ' be invited to present additional statements 'throughout the meeting. And in the four Commissions representatives of Member-States who will form part of the Community delegation will also be able to comment on specific questions. Both at the Ministerial Conference and in the Commissions our statements will be consistent with whatever Community position or mandate has been agreed by us. But in our interventions, both by my right honourable friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary at the Ministerial Conference and by our officials in the Commissions, we shall be able to draw attention to particular problems and be 775 able to make a United Kingdom contribution which reflects our own very different situation and experience."
My Lords, that is the end of the Statement.
§ 4.23 p.m.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, I should like to thank the noble Lord, Lord Goronwy-Roberts, for repeating that Answer to a Question here. In doing so may I just say how glad so many of us are that he has become our deputy spokesman on the Front Bench. I have known him for many years and have never known anyone more sincere or more selfless in serving the causes in which he believes. My Lords, I tabled a Private Notice Question today because I wanted to ensure that we would have this Statement read to us. In the normal way when in another place a Minister takes the initiative to make a Statement after Questions it is repeated here if it is of sufficient importance, but when a statement is made in answer to a Question at Question Time in another place it does not necessarily come before this House, and because I felt this Statement was so important I took the course of tabling a Private Notice Question.
I imagine that this reply to a Question at Question Time in another place is almost unique in its length. It has shown that the two-day Conference at Rome covered an enormous sphere of issues. If we were to believe the Press we should believe that it was concerned only with an angry exchange regarding British representation at the Paris Conference. On that I just want to say that it seems to me to be a sensible compromise that there should be a spokesman of the European Community and at the same time an opportunity for the representative of Luxembourg to speak specially for consumers and for a British representative to speak specially for a potential oil producer.
I will just ask the Minister this. I notice that in the Statement the representatives of Luxembourg and of the United Kingdom must speak within the European Community mandate. Does that mean that they must not speak outside the consensus which has been reached by the European Community? As the Statement 776 which has been repeated by my noble friend Lord Goronwy-Roberts has indicated, the Conference at Paris will be concerned with much more than oil. One-third of the delegates will be raising the whole issue of the economic arrangements between the Third World and the industrialised nations.
§ Baroness LLEWELYN-DAVIES of HASTOEMy Lords, if I may interrupt my noble friend for a second, it is agreed that brief comments and questions are allowed on a Statement but this should not be an occasion for an immediate debate and I hope my noble friend will bear that in mind.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, I will bear it in mind and I apologise if I was speaking at too great a length. I will satisfy myself by asking this. At Paris the whole question of the relations of the Third World to the industrialised nations and their proposal for a new international economic order will be discussed. Has the Community yet reached decisions as to what their answer is to be to those requests, or is this to be left over until the meeting of Foreign Ministers at Brussels next week? Lastly, is there not a danger of these issues being discussed by too many organisations—the Paris Conference, the United Nations, UNCTAD, UNESCO, the Commonwealth Prime Ministers—and are any steps being taken by which their activities can be co-ordinated?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSOn the last point, my noble friend will be aware that the United Nations are looking at the question of rationalising the agencies of discussion and therefore of activity in the field of aid in its various aspects. I must thank my noble friend for his kindly remarks to me and also for the phrase he has used with regard to the agreement that we have achieved in Rome, that it is a sensible compromise. It is in fact a workable compromise which takes into account proper British interests and also the need for unity among the Members of the Community.
The noble Lord asked whether we and the representative of Luxembourg—who, by the way, will have a special voice because of the fact of a transition period between one six months' presidency and another—will have to speak within the European mandate. Of course that will 777 be so, in so far as that mandate (or whatever parts of it have been arrived at) is a fact. We have never objected to there being an agreed European mandate, and having agreed to a European mandate of course we shall keep within it. This does not mean that even then, having agreed to a mandate in regard to certain aspects of these questions, we shall not have special things to say. I am quite sure that our friends and allies in the Community will expect us to do so, as they, at certain times in regard to certain vital interests of their own, are not by any means chary of doing.
§ 4.30 p.m.
§ Lord CARRINGTONMy Lords, I say this more in sorrow than in anger, but the whole tenor of that Statement and, I think, the actions of the Government over the last few weeks, seem to me to give the impression of a Government dragging their feet in Europe, which is almost an unwilling partner, and which concentrates purely on the difficulties. I think it is time the Government decided once and for all to be an active and constructive member of the European Economic Community. It seems to me that my impression has been compounded by the dispute about representation at the Energy Conference. I made plain what I thought about it in the debate we had on foreign affairs the other day, but I confess I did not really think it would be quite as bad as it has turned out.
My Lords, we have a situation which has generated the maximum amount of ill will. I believe it has reduced the standing of this country in Europe, and it has created suspicions about us which I believe will last for a very long time. All this for nothing, because even if I thought it were really necessary to achieve the compromise the Prime Minister has achieved—and I am not sure it is—I believe it would have been possible to have done that without all the fuss and bother of the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary making the statements we have read about in the newspapers.
If I may say so, it has been a ham-fisted performance, and there is only one thing I hope; that is, that the Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary and the Government have learned their lesson, and that they will recollect in the future the damage they did to themselves and to the country on this occasion.
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I am most grateful for those observations. The noble Lord, Lord Carrington, warned us that he was going to be very rude. I do not think that comes easily to him, with the result that he has indulged not in rudeness, but in perfectly proper and debatable criticisms. I profoundly disagree with him. He called this exercise ham-fisted, but if it was, it has certainly brought home the bacon! It is a fact that we have shown to the British people—and they are our first audience—that we are concerned about their vital interests, just as our partners in the Community are always ready to say that they are willing to fight for their vital interests; so why should Britain be the odd man out in that exercise?
§ 4.33 p.m.
§ Lord BANKSMy Lords, while thanking the noble Lord, Lord Goronwy-Roberts, for repeating the Statement made in another place, I should like to say that we on these Benches feel, with the noble Lord, Lord Carrington, that it was simply not worth while to create so much ill will within the Community in order to arrive at this rather limited compromise over representation at the International Economic Conference. We agree with the noble Lord, Lord Carrington, that it is a great pity that the impression has been created in recent weeks that the Government are less than enthusiastic about Community solidarity.
My Lords, I should like to ask whether the noble Lord would agree that the development of a united standpoint by the Community on energy and on other similar matters is a vital British interest? We on these Benches also felt a great disappointment that the Government have rejected the target date of 1978 as the date for British participation in direct elections to the European Parliament. I wonder whether the noble Lord could give us a little further indication of what will be the timetable about consultations. Can he tell us whether it is proposed to deal entirely with the devolution issue before we come to the question of direct elections, or whether they will be dealt with together, at the same time? Finally, I welcome the reference in the Statement to stricter financial control in the Community and also the proposal for a uniform passport.
§ 4.35 p.m.
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, it is not a limited restricted gain to have persuaded our partners of the need, so far as we are concerned, for a minimum safeguard price for oil. This is a very big achievement indeed. If it is not, why was it resisted for so long? It is not a limited achievement to have got agreement in principle on the organisation and dispersal of emergency supplies. This is a very big question, and bears very closely on the future of the economy of this country and, therefore, of Western Europe.
The noble Lord, Lord Banks, was good enough to say that he welcomes certain aspects of this Statement. I would ask him to examine it more closely, particularly that section of it which shows that now our partners accept the British view, and it was a British view and a British initiative, calling for proper control over expenditure in the Community, based on the well-tested and proven Parliamentary practice in this country, the Public Accounts Committee.
§ 4.36 p.m.
Lord HOME of the HIRSELMy Lords, I wonder whether the House would allow me to associate myself with the tributes paid to the noble Lord, Lord Goronwy-Roberts. He and I have sat opposite each other in the other place for 10 years, and on every occasion he dealt with the matters within his portfolio with the greatest courtesy and care, and for that all of us are grateful. Despite the Statement to which I listened with close attention, and the persuasiveness of the noble Lord, I am bound to say that the negotiations in Rome, and that part dealing with oil, left me, and still does, with a rathernasty taste in my mouth. Does the noble Lord recognise that our partners in the European Economic Community have lately leant over backwards to help us in our economic difficulties? Does he recognise, too, that although it is right that British Ministers should stand up for British interests—and North Sea Oil is British oil—in this matter of fuel for power, if we are to maintain our industrial standards, we shall need all the coal, oil, gas and nuclear fuel that can be mobilised? Although we have a temporary advantage as a producer, are we not essentially in Europe therefore, 780 and indeed, in the North Atlantic area, all in the same boat? All I am asking is that in future negotiations—I do not think this was observed last time—his right honourable friend should take that into account.
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, it would be quite impossible to resist the tone and content of that contribution. I am most grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Home of the Hirsel, for what he has said. On the question of the importance of energy in the productive as well as the internal economy of this country, it is of significance that by 1980 we shall be producing 90 per cent. of the oil produced in Western Europe. Surely, this gives to this country a reason for looking at this point with very great care to see that whatever mandate we agree to takes into account that very large and important fact. Moreover, by that time we shall be producing 45 per cent. of the entire energy produced in the Community, if we count the four sources mentioned by the noble Lord—coal, gas, nuclear energy and oil. Of course, these things change. In the meantime, it is reasonable that the British Government should establish a position of reasonable security for its people and for its economy, pending the agreed mandate on a Community basis that this Government, as much as the Opposition, have worked for and hopes to achieve.
§ Lord AVEBURYMy Lords, if all that was required by the Government was that we should be able to express a view at the Conference on International Economic Co-operation where matters that did not come within the Community mandate were concerned, why did not the Prime Minister ask for that in the first place?—thus avoiding all the argument. Is there not a danger that, by adopting these tactics and asking for much more than one expects to receive in the end, in future our partners in the Community will think we are prepared to bargain downwards from something we originally asked for?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I do not expect in the foreseeable future that relations between friends and allies will not be relations of give-and-take and indeed of bargaining. This is well understood. As to the methods by which this excellent result has been 781 achieved, that is a matter for judgment, not for outright denunciation.
§ The Earl of ONSLOWMy Lords, "Yes, but" having been said on Community direct elections to Parliament, are the elections going to be run on the same system throughout the Community, and if so are we going to have to change our methods of election or are the whole of the Continent going to change theirs?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSNo, my Lords, not necessarily. As to how these elections should be conducted—and we are wholeheartedly with the principle of achieving direct elections, if possible, by a given date—although the principle is accepted, there must be a wide area of detail left to the nation States. We believe that there is a general consensus among the members of the Community that this is inevitable, and indeed best.
§ Lord BOOTHBYMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that ever since 1949, when the Council of Europe was established, we in this country have contrived to give the impression that we are basically anti-European and that the events of the last few days show that, despite the referendum, that impression still prevails on the Continent of Europe?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I am quite sure that if that impression prevails it will be dispelled in the very near future. We recall a time when the whole world was aware, as they thought, of an anti-Commonwealth feeling in this country. That has been dispelled in the last 18 months or so. There was a time, about two years ago or less, when there was an impression abroad that this country was anti-American. That impression, too, has been dispelled by this Government.